Appeal No. 1999-1796
Application 08/705,149
The Examiner relies on the following prior art:
Kang 5,299,168 March 29,
1994
Claims 1-5, 9-33, 36, and 38-51 stand rejected under
35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as being anticipated by Kang.
We refer to the final rejection (Paper No. 8) and the
examiner's answer (Paper No. 13) (pages referred to as "EA__")
for a statement of the Examiner's position, and to the brief
(Paper No. 12) (pages referred to as "Br__") and the reply
brief (Paper No. 14) (pages referred to as "RBr__") for a
statement of Appellant's arguments thereagainst.
OPINION
Grouping of claims
The brief states that the claims stand or fall together
(Br3), which means that the Board is free to select the
broadest claim from the group to decide the appeal. See
37 CFR § 1.192(c)(7) (1997). Both Appellant and the Examiner
address claim 30 as the representative claim (Br6; EA4). We
do not consider claim 30 to be the broadest claim, but address
it because it is argued. Appellant quotes parts of claims 1,
31, 36, and 47 and argues that these claims are not
- 4 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007